UC Irvine Law Ranking Forum

[tru]

.

[Borhas]

don't be so hard on yourself brofessor klump, I don't think you're bleak, I think you're a most humble, bright, and good humored fellow

[Drake014]

Top. 20.
I am sick of hearing trash talk on UCI law becuase I have no idea where its coming from. Their median GPA is 3.65, and their median LSAT is 167, and NO it did not drop when the second class wasn't offered a full ride AND the class size increased.Wanna compare that to some other law schools?

USC GPA 3.60, LSAT 167
Cornell GPA 3.67, LSAT 167
Boston University GPA 3.77, LSAT 166
Notre Dame GPA 3.6 LSAT 166

Numbers don't lie. UCI's a top 20, no doubt. ABA can't *promise* accreditation, but realistically, UCI has pretty much already been guaranteed.
I think the people that are criticizing UCI and comparing it to 2nd tier schools probably only got into 2nd tier schools and are just bitter. UCI's faculty comes from THE BEST schools in the country- schools you probably didnt even get into- so i suggest you stop whining and just get the best education you can at whatever school you DID get into.

You do realize that GPA and LSAT aren't the only things that determine ranking, right?

[tru]

.

[psyers]

Actually, a litigation director at the ACLU, several partners at a midtown firm, 5 different law profs from 4 different schools suggested I attend UCI. Each is very optimistic about UCI rankings and expect it to debut in upper T1.

Separately, you are a very ugly person. "Mass suicide?" No, you're not talking shit at all.

The actual litigators mentoned the rankings? My associates and partners always get sort of a blank look on their face whenever we law applicants discuss such things.

They each said they only interview applicants from "top schools" or some such generalization and all of them anticipated UCI to be in that pool. Many of them expressed the expectation that Irvine will be especially effective in producing PI attorneys, that good PI jobs are to be had by its graduates.

Other than the sneery grumps in here, most law students share my optimism for UCI and consider me lucky to be involved. It's such a great group of people there, I can't wait to start.

[RisingMichigan3L]

several partners at a midtown firm

This can mean anything. It could be talking about a crappy big firm in midtown that takes only 10 summer associates every year, at which point you're already in over your head since there is at least one student at each T14 who will be gunning for those jobs, in addition to other students at lower-ranked schools.

It could also be talking about a "bulge bracket" big law firm that has mega summer associate classes. For those firms, around 90% will come from a T14 and 10% will come from "everywhere else."

Either way, it's not a good position to be in.

And word of wisdom from someone who cried over getting into law school, then analyzed to death which school I should attend: Don't ever trust associates and partners when you ask them "how's x school?" You will never, ever get an honest answer. They will, almost invariably, either give heaps of praise to your school, saying "we love people from there," or if the school is an obvious TTT, say "oh, it's a good place; you'll get a great education from there." But the reality is that the hiring committee decides where to interview and whom to recruit. At the end of the day, an individual partner can love a school all he wants, but that doesn't mean that his firm will recruit there or will be willing to take a student from there over many other promising applicants.

I remember asking a partner at my firm how Michigan compares to Columbia and NYU... whether my firm looks more favorably on the latter. He said, "they're all great schools. We get fine students from all of them. There's really no difference." My summer class as 10+ each from Columbia, NYU, and Harvard. I'm the only one from Michigan (and, as far as I can tell, the only one to have even received an offer). Right.

[RisingMichigan3L]

I think UCI is a great opportunity to get a good education for little money. But if you go in expecting or even hoping to end up with a job in biglaw, you probably are too dumb to end up in biglaw in the first place.

[psyers]

several partners at a midtown firm

This can mean anything. It could be talking about a crappy big firm in midtown that takes only 10 summer associates every year, at which point you're already in over your head since there is at least one student at each T14 who will be gunning for those jobs, in addition to other students at lower-ranked schools.

It could also be talking about a "bulge bracket" big law firm that has mega summer associate classes. For those firms, around 90% will come from a T14 and 10% will come from "everywhere else."

Either way, it's not a good position to be in.

And word of wisdom from someone who cried over getting into law school, then analyzed to death which school I should attend: Don't ever trust associates and partners when you ask them "how's x school?" You will never, ever get an honest answer. They will, almost invariably, either give heaps of praise to your school, saying "we love people from there," or if the school is an obvious TTT, say "oh, it's a good place; you'll get a great education from there." But the reality is that the hiring committee decides where to interview and whom to recruit. At the end of the day, an individual partner can love a school all he wants, but that doesn't mean that his firm will recruit there or will be willing to take a student from there over many other promising applicants.

I remember asking a partner at my firm how Michigan compares to Columbia and NYU... whether my firm looks more favorably on the latter. He said, "they're all great schools. We get fine students from all of them. There's really no difference." My summer class as 10+ each from Columbia, NYU, and Harvard. I'm the only one from Michigan (and, as far as I can tell, the only one to have even received an offer). Right.

Point taken. I offered the example of partners at Dewey & LeBeouf, ACLU, and law profs to counter that high strung fellow who claimed UCI would be a laughing stock in such places. He seemed to claim that the majority of the people in these positions thought or would think it a laughable program, which my experience perfectly contradicted. I've been lucky enough work for and make good friends with people in these positions and they all shared my view. Each of them know me well enough to avoid powdering my cake and spoke honestly. I usually don't engage with such obviously unreasonable people, but since mentioned the exact group of people I happened to consult I thought I'd respond....

As for the big firms, my experience confirms what you're saying--they love to count off Ivy JD's to their clients. Sadly, as a paralegal I often found those associates from the Ivies were often the least effective.

[psyers]

I think UCI is a great opportunity to get a good education for little money. But if you go in expecting or even hoping to end up with a job in biglaw, you probably are too dumb to end up in biglaw in the first place.

1. I will not end up at big law. Not the life for me.
2. Big Law with offices in SC will definitely hire from UCI; they are the source of funding for all this scholarship.

[doyleoil]

all i want to know is if we can just please for god's sake have five seconds in this country where a new law school doesn't open up

is that so much to ask

[Aberzombie1892]

all i want to know is if we can just please for god's sake have five seconds in this country where a new law school doesn't open up

is that so much to ask

No. There will probably be a new one at least every five years.

Now that UCI is projected to debut in the top 50, the cats out of the bag.

Other law schools will open with tiny class sizes and full scholarships to the entering class (or so).

Why, you ask?

For the sole reason of gaming the rankings. Existing schools are all at a disadvantage. Some people may say it won't affect T1 schools much, but imagine if: The university of north carolina opened a new law school at another campus with full scholarships to the first few classes (and all of the other good stuff). While it may not affect schools in the northeast or west coast, it would certainly affect UNC-Chapel Hill, Wake Forest, and Duke (if not U of South Carolina and some Virginia schools).

[20160810]

Step 1.) maintain ranking after people have to pay the full freight

[mhernton]

I guess no one read my post, they certainly didn't comment on it other than a few PMs. I have an MBA from the Rady School of Management at UCSD. Its a new business program, and UCI is following its model to develop as a law school. All the things being said about UCI were being said about Rady 5 years ago, and the local business community has been supportive, hence the name 'Rady' like the children's hospital in San Diego etc. Rady has the numbers to be on par with Top 10 Business Programs, it poached their staff from all the best schools in the country the same as UCI is doing now. They still aren't ranked. No one has yet to explain to me how or why UCI's legal program will be different from this trend, and how UCI will just jump into the top 20 over schools like William & Mary, Iowa, Minnesota, George Washington etc... I'm glad the enthusiasm is there, and I appreciate it, but schools don't magically jump into the top of Tier 1, in a vocation where pedigree is so important. My analysis has nothing to do with the quality of education, just simple experience predicated on logical. Anyone who perpetuates the notion that UCI will magically ascend rankings mountain is doing a disservice to others who may be considering the school instead of another. The last major program the come into the Rankings was Michigan State 7 years ago. They haven't broken out of Tier 3, why would UCI be different?? If someone has some insight I do not please share...

[d34d9823]

I guess no one read my post, blah blah blah

We all read your post. No one cares. You may have missed it, but this is top LAW schools. If you want to talk about B schools, I'm sure there are forums out there.

[Mr. Matlock]

Step 1.) maintain ranking after people have to pay the full freight

That's probably my second favorite tar of yours, SBL. However, you'll always be Burly Man to me.

--ImageRemoved--

[holydonkey]

I guess no one read my post, they certainly didn't comment on it other than a few PMs. I have an MBA from the Rady School of Management at UCSD. Its a new business program, and UCI is following its model to develop as a law school. All the things being said about UCI were being said about Rady 5 years ago, and the local business community has been supportive, hence the name 'Rady' like the children's hospital in San Diego etc. Rady has the numbers to be on par with Top 10 Business Programs, it poached their staff from all the best schools in the country the same as UCI is doing now. They still aren't ranked. No one has yet to explain to me how or why UCI's legal program will be different from this trend, and how UCI will just jump into the top 20 over schools like William & Mary, Iowa, Minnesota, George Washington etc... I'm glad the enthusiasm is there, and I appreciate it, but schools don't magically jump into the top of Tier 1, in a vocation where pedigree is so important. My analysis has nothing to do with the quality of education, just simple experience predicated on logical. Anyone who perpetuates the notion that UCI will magically ascend rankings mountain is doing a disservice to others who may be considering the school instead of another. The last major program the come into the Rankings was Michigan State 7 years ago. They haven't broken out of Tier 3, why would UCI be different?? If someone has some insight I do not please share...

That's all well and good, but you're forgetting about lsat and gpa averages. UCI's averages are on par with averages at T20 schools, thus UCI will be a T20 school.

[Mr. Matlock]

I guess no one read my post, they certainly didn't comment on it other than a few PMs. I have an MBA from the Rady School of Management at UCSD. Its a new business program, and UCI is following its model to develop as a law school. All the things being said about UCI were being said about Rady 5 years ago, and the local business community has been supportive, hence the name 'Rady' like the children's hospital in San Diego etc. Rady has the numbers to be on par with Top 10 Business Programs, it poached their staff from all the best schools in the country the same as UCI is doing now. They still aren't ranked. No one has yet to explain to me how or why UCI's legal program will be different from this trend, and how UCI will just jump into the top 20 over schools like William & Mary, Iowa, Minnesota, George Washington etc... I'm glad the enthusiasm is there, and I appreciate it, but schools don't magically jump into the top of Tier 1, in a vocation where pedigree is so important. My analysis has nothing to do with the quality of education, just simple experience predicated on logical. Anyone who perpetuates the notion that UCI will magically ascend rankings mountain is doing a disservice to others who may be considering the school instead of another. The last major program the come into the Rankings was Michigan State 7 years ago. They haven't broken out of Tier 3, why would UCI be different?? If someone has some insight I do not please share...

If you could post it 2-3 more times, I might be able to sneak in a minute to comment.

[Danteshek]

I guess no one read my post, they certainly didn't comment on it other than a few PMs. I have an MBA from the Rady School of Management at UCSD. Its a new business program, and UCI is following its model to develop as a law school. All the things being said about UCI were being said about Rady 5 years ago, and the local business community has been supportive, hence the name 'Rady' like the children's hospital in San Diego etc. Rady has the numbers to be on par with Top 10 Business Programs, it poached their staff from all the best schools in the country the same as UCI is doing now. They still aren't ranked. No one has yet to explain to me how or why UCI's legal program will be different from this trend, and how UCI will just jump into the top 20 over schools like William & Mary, Iowa, Minnesota, George Washington etc... I'm glad the enthusiasm is there, and I appreciate it, but schools don't magically jump into the top of Tier 1, in a vocation where pedigree is so important. My analysis has nothing to do with the quality of education, just simple experience predicated on logical. Anyone who perpetuates the notion that UCI will magically ascend rankings mountain is doing a disservice to others who may be considering the school instead of another. The last major program the come into the Rankings was Michigan State 7 years ago. They haven't broken out of Tier 3, why would UCI be different?? If someone has some insight I do not please share...

The MBA is not a real degree. It's an excuse to do nothing for two years.

[najumobi]

I agree with Ken that UCI will place somewhere in the 20s.

their median lsat is currently 167 (partly due to half schollys for its entire class) and their lsat median won't go any lower than 166 b/c that's the highest lsat score for usc applicants who don't have a realistic shot at getting into usc. The only applicants not getting into USC with a 167 or greater are those who have below a 3.5 gpa (which is a small proportion of applicants with that lsat score). So i think the bulk of UCI's class will be made up of 166 lsaters. I think the 166 lsat median coupled with employment placement and assessment scores will land them in the mid to upper 20s range of the rankings.

[Mickey Quicknumbers]

Step 1.) maintain ranking after people have to pay the full freight

For now this is the credited response. It's going to be difficult to argue where the school's ranking is gonna be without knowing what their peer/judge review scores are going to be, which is btw weighted 60% more than the LSAT/GPA combined measure.

Also off topic, may I say that Blue In Green might be the perfect song to listen to while it's raining? Try it some time if you haven't.

[Blindmelon]

The MBA is not a real degree. It's an excuse to do nothing for two years.

So its like a law degree with 1 less year of tuition?

[dcm81]

There is no way that UC Irvine will be top 20 the first year. What law school or judge from Alabama would give them a score of 3 or 4? UCI will probably still have numbers around 165/3.6 when they are rankable and ABA approved, but don't expect their reputation scores to be as good as Minnesota, Texas, or UCLA. UCI is a new school, a small school, and on the west coast with no alumni. Their reputation is going to take years for them to become a top 20 school. They will probably start out around the top 50 and work their way slowly up.

[ENGINEERD]

The only thing I have learned from this thread is that the majority sees UCI as a bad investment, which is great because the majority of people on TLS suggested I attend UCI...

Although I really like the school I don't think they can more than double the class size and maintain their numbers without giving significant scholarships. I see them falling somewhere in the 30-40 range when they become ranked (Which is still a great accomplishment). Also I think UCI's job prospects for the first few classes are overstated. Employers might say they will hire their graduates but when the time comes I can't imagine employers hiring a UCI grads over USC or UCLA. I don't know what the point of this post was I just couldn't read 5 pages without posting something.

One more thing. Although there is a lot of speculation about UCI, one thing I know for certain is that it will smash Southwestern/Loyola/Pepperdine/Chapman and if I went to those schools I would be pissed too.

[tru]

.

[dcm81]

1) Check the profiles of the haters in this thread. Most are from Southwestern/Loyola/Hastings/Davis/Chapman (havent seen Pepperdine). After a few pages, I stopped taking them seriously for this reason.

2) The majority of people, including TLS members, professors, and regional law firms, all have love for UCI.

3) It will be interesting to see how UCI grads will fare against UCLA & USC. It's anyone's guess. But I'm optimistic because the class size is so small, and the school has the resources to give them a push. It makes sense because it's manageable.

4) I don't think UCI had Southwestern/Loyola/Davis/Hastings/Pepperdine/Chapman in their mind as competitions. I think UCI vs USC vs UCLA is more appropriate. The composition of the first and second class, and scholarship prospect is too strategic to think anything other than a deliberate attempt at T20 debut. But we all knew that. I just haven't read any good argument why they would fail.[/quote]


They are going to fail because they won't get the reputation scores needed. TLS members don't guide the rankings, professors and judges do. Some deans/professors will love UCI, others won't even know where the hell UCI is. Judges/Partners won't have much to judge UCI by in terms of how they fare in the courtroom, so I doubt they are going to score in the 3 range there either. Their GPA/LSAT scores will assure them or a ranking somewhere in the top 50 range, but I would be shocked if they hit top 20 the first year out. If they did that would be a tremendous achievement that I doubt has ever been achieved by a law school in the USNews era of rankings.